Delete notifier
shodan_notifier_deleteDelete a Shodan notifier by its ID to stop alert notifications from being sent through that configured channel.
Instructions
Delete a notifier by id.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
shodan_notifier_deleteDelete a Shodan notifier by its ID to stop alert notifications from being sent through that configured channel.
Delete a notifier by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'by id' – it does not mention irreversibility, required permissions, or effects of deleting a notifier that may be attached to alerts.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient completeness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a destructive mutation tool with no output schema, and the description says nothing about return behavior, side effects, or whether deletion affects alert configurations. For a delete operation, the definition is too sparse to be fully self-sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the only parameter, id, is undocumented in the schema. The description saying 'by id' identifies the parameter's role but does not explain the expected identifier format, where to obtain it, or error behavior for invalid ids.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource: delete a notifier by id. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling notifier tools such as shodan_notifier_get or shodan_notifier_create.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warning about when deletion should be avoided. Usage is only implied by the word 'Delete'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.